muppetfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Minor Comics Mentions
Date dispute One FBoFW comic is listed as having run December 12, 1990. I've found it in the Toronto Star two days prior. The date currently listed is from the official website of the comic. Do I go with the earliest date it appeared in print, or the date which it possibly ran everywhere else in the world? (Note the Star was one of the first papers to run the strip, so if any paper got to run them first, they'd surely be the ones to get the special privileges.) -- Zanimum 17:51, August 13, 2011 (UTC) :The web site matches with the correct days of the week; December 10, 1990 was a Monday, and the December 9 strip is correctly a Sunday format. The December 8 strip is the end of a weeklong storyline. The only explanation I can come up with for why the 12/10 strip appeared on 12/8 in the Star is if something about the 12/8 strip was deemed unsuitable for printing. Powers 21:18, August 16, 2011 (UTC) ::I guess that might explain it. The Star is a pretty liberal paper though, for mainstream publications. I would have thought that they'd have run it, by the 1990s. -- Zanimum 23:06, August 16, 2011 (UTC) :::Also the simplest explanation: the paper could have just goofed and run the two strips out of sequence by mistake. It still happens today (or ends of panels are cut off, not for censorship but just plain sloppiness, or Gary Larson discusses the many times his strips ran with their captions swapped with Dennis the Menace, or upside down, or the next day's strip caption wound up on the prior strip, and I've had occasion to notice the incorrect date on a strip and notice it's out of order, or the same one rerun for two days, and on and on). Human nature being what it is, I strongly suspect a goof on somebody's part (at the Star, at the syndicate, somewhere in between), but it really doesn't matter now that we've confirmed that the date is accurate. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 00:14, August 17, 2011 (UTC) Geez, now I feel dumb. Our date says December 12, 1990, which was a Wednesday; if the strip ran on the 10th in the Star, then that was correct. I don't know how I read "December 12" as "December 10". I apologize for the confusion. I'll update the page to show December 10, which will match with both Zanimum's finding in the Star and the FBoFW web site. Gah. Powers 15:29, August 19, 2011 (UTC) Notable? Do we have a sense of when a comic is notable enough to be listed here? Does webcomic mean "anything posted on a web page"? D'Snowth uploaded a bunch of comics today including panels from "The Rebusquest" and "The Jose Comics", and they both look like a kid's drawings. I found the Rebusquest on a site, and it's basically a kid's drawings on a website. It's hard to tell how to judge webcomics standards -- sort of a "you know it when you see it" thing. Anybody have thoughts? -- Danny (talk) 18:06, February 28, 2011 (UTC) Kermitcomic.jpg|The Joseph Comics Rebusquest.jpg|The Rebusquest :I remember Andrew weighing in on this topic at one point, but I don't know where now. I want to say we set up rules for how to determine what makes a webcomic notable, but I don't remember what they were. In this case, I think we can use common sense and declare this one as not notable. —Scott (contact) 19:42, February 28, 2011 (UTC) ::Gah. Likewise. This was my definition at the time by the way, though I'd modify it only just slightly now: "King Features is one of the leading print comics syndicates (Hagar, Beetle Bailey, Popeye, etc.) Ads or tip jars are a good sign, but pretty much any site which is solely dedicated to a webcomic, and not an adjunct to a blog or forum or what have you, and which isn't quite literally a fancomic (i.e. some rabid Muppet afficianado decides to write "Kermit and Piggy Go to Hawaii" comics, basically fanfic in strip forum), and has clearly lasted more than two weeks or so, would count. Webcomics are essentially now somewhere between underground comics and indie small-press publishers, as an industry, and have been covered in legit articles (Hogan's Alley and other comic journals discuss them periodically, as has U.S. News and so on), the focus of multiple panels at the San Diego Comic Con, and several have indeed been collected in print, sometimes by the same publishers who anthologize syndicated newspaper comics. So just because it's on the web doesn't make it a "fan comic"; it depends on the above factors and more. If you're unsure of any, give the links here and I'll assess what I know about their history." ::Quality of legit webcomics certainly varies but the best are indistinguishable from a syndicated comic, and the more amateurish in art would qualify based on notability (Homestar Runner, flash cartoons rather than a webcomic, isn't high art but it's successful and popular). So yeah, this fails the same basic tests as our limits on what qualifies as an Internet Mention in general for our purposes and which YouTube videos would fit. I think it rather fits my joking "Kermit and Piggy fanfic in strip form" definition even, so yeah, delete. -- Andrew Leal (talk) ::: I should also note, some webcomic character has made cameos in Retail, a syndicated comic, so that's another notability guarantee. Wikipedia paints all web material with the same notability brush. There are also another set of guidelines that I personally like, that one Wikipedia established. -- Zanimum 23:13, August 16, 2011 (UTC) Comics to add At work on break, can't deal with them now... -- Zanimum 14:53, December 14, 2010 (UTC) http://library.torstarphotos.com/viewpicture.tlx?gsearchid=1292349848&pictureid=53537 http://library.torstarphotos.com/viewpicture.tlx?gsearchid=1292347851&pictureid=52741 http://library.torstarphotos.com/viewpicture.tlx?gsearchid=1292349848&pictureid=29484 http://library.torstarphotos.com/viewpicture.tlx?gsearchid=1292345864&pictureid=29610 130 comics: can we separate? Can we start separating this page up? Perhaps break the web comics off to their own page, so this is only print comics, editorials, and comic books? It's just almost to the point of unwieldy, especially for the large fraction of the public that isn't familiar with web comics. -- Zanimum 13:37, November 6, 2010 (UTC) :I wouldn't be averse to splitting it up into categories, but it might get a little confusing if we give each one its own article. — Joe (talk) 21:42, November 6, 2010 (UTC) ::Sheer numbers are less important than browsability and consistency, and the web comics point is actually fairly moot since most of the *print* comics covered here actually feature the colored versions which appear exclusively on the web (and a lot of this applies to the editorials as well). Plus, Nick, webcomics (i.e. comics which originated or appear excluseively on the web) are the definite minority here (it's just that print papers have limited selection and some of the syndicated strips only appear in certain markets anymore) so that wouldn't make a dent. ::What makes more sense is to simply look at it and see which entries by now have grown to where they deserve their own pages, which is what we always do in such cases. ::Bizarro, for example, with seven and counting plus a bunch from pre-2006 which we haven't got to (mainly because they're not online). The Family Circus, I have old paperbacks with at least two more. Also, some of this stuff just doesn't count period, i.e. Dave Hulteen. It's a nice pic but it's not a webcomic, it's a fan drawing and a bunch of his work is covered at Toughpigs here, so a single link or some other way to handle purely fan comics (i.e. not part of any actual ongoing comic series/editorial) would help. I'll probably go ahead and take that out soon. Finally, the actual print comic *book* samples are currently kind of randomly stuck in, so I'd favor a seperate "Minor Comic Books Mentions" for comic books/graphic novels (where context for the bits of Darkwing or Little Annie Fanny, which currently lack years, issue numbers, etc. would be useful) seems the best way to handle those (it's mostly been unneeded since most minor mentions to date have been happily housed in Marvel Comics or DC Comics. ::Finally, beyond consistency needed (changing lists of cartoonist's name to that of the strip; the Chris Smigliano stuff is actually from his print strip For Art's Sake in The Comics Buyer's Guide), just separating the editorials into a different section (with a header) and, if desired, likewise for the print books could help (but as I said, the latter really need more details than they currently have and, since they're not standalone strips, often more context, and something like Little Annie Fanny has connections through Harvey Kurtzman (or it could simply be moved to Playboy and the comics reference category tag added). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 22:07, November 6, 2010 (UTC) :::I went ahead and categorized this page as best I could (I'm sure at least a couple of them are in the wrong place, but it's a start). The whole article looks much cleaner already! — Joe (talk) 19:49, April 5, 2011 (UTC) Darkwing Duck A preview for BOOM! Studios next Darkwing Duck comic has been released online and the firs tpage has a number of Muppet references in the background (such as a Fozzie Bear toy on the top left shelf, a toy frog with Kermit-like eyes, and toys that look like Dr. Teeth and a Chicken, only with their heads above the respective panels). I assume that's not enough to give Darkwing Duck his own article here (though that show does have a number of Muppet connectiosn that could be listed). But I was looking at this page and I don't know how to list it here. The top paragraph says this is for comic strips and comic books, but I haven't seen any comic book headings, and the Muppet references in this are not as obvious as the others. None of the other comic mentions include image catpions aside from titles and dates. Any idea on how to handle this? Of course I won't be surprised if more Muppet references appear in the comic down the line. --Minor muppetz 17:17, June 28, 2010 (UTC) :I would just take that panel and use it like the comic strips, and make note of it that way. It's a super fun panel. Not only are there Muppet references, but Weezy, Potato Head, Bo Peep, Hamm and Woody from Toy STory can be seen, Mrs. Potts from Beauty and the Beast, Cooties, a ghost from Pac-Man, Godzilla, a dinosaur that reminds me of the Jurassic Park toys, Transformers, Lite-Brite (with a Punisher reference I think), a nod to Batman, Noah's Ark and more. I would use the main panel though, as the chicken reference seems a little iffy to me, and the Dr. Teeth isn't that impressive to look at. Just note that maybe. -- Nate (talk) 18:20, June 28, 2010 (UTC) description Think we should change the text from "newspaper comics" to something else? There's at least two webcomics on the page already, probably lots more to come. — Joe (talk) 14:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC) :Done. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 15:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Dilbert http://www.dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-05-06/ BlueFrackle 21:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC) Aptitude Test This Aptitude Test page has a reference to Fraggle Rock: http://aptitude.surfacingpoint.com/index.php?show=20110323 JHVipond 16:16, March 24, 2011 (UTC) LCD (Comic Genesis) The September 28, 2012, page of LCD features both a poorly disguised Big Bird and a reference to the film Looper: http://lcd.comicgenesis.com/d/20120928.html JHVipond (talk) 19:44, October 1, 2012 (UTC) Randall Enos - source I've found the source for those two comics by Randall Enos: they were from a story in the April 1981 issue of National Lampoon magazine ("The Decline and Fall of the Muppet Empire"). Should we move these to the National Lampoon page? Image:Strip_-_Randall_Enos_the_Lampoon_1.jpg Image:Strip_-_Randall_Enos_the_Lampoon_2.jpg MasterYoshi (talk) 05:08, March 17, 2013 (UTC) :Yeah, absolutely. Nice find! —Scott (message me) 13:27, March 18, 2013 (UTC)